MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3186429835 · doi:10.1029/2021gl094607

Underwater Sound Levels in the Arctic: Filling Knowledge Gaps

2021· article· en· W3186429835 on OpenAlexaff
William D. Halliday

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsWildlife Conservation Society CanadaUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticUnderwaterSound (geography)OceanographyClimate changeBaseline (sea)The arcticSea iceSoundscapeEnvironmental scienceArctic ice packGeologyPhysical geographyClimatologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Climate change is projected to cause the Arctic soundscape to become noisier due to sea ice loss and increased anthropogenic activity. Many studies on underwater sound levels have been conducted in the western North American Arctic and Fram Strait, but the rest of the Arctic is full of geographic gaps. Han et al. (2021, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021gl093097 ) published a study in Geophysical Research Letters on underwater sound levels in the East Siberian Sea, providing the first estimates of seasonal trends and the natural and anthropogenic drivers of underwater sound levels in this region. This is an excellent first step in filling geographic gaps in the Russian Arctic, and I call on other researchers to continue to fill these geographic gaps throughout the Arctic so that we can set a baseline and study changes to underwater sound levels being caused directly and indirectly by climate change.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→